Martial arts expert who beat woman savagely is back on the police force

Chief angered by officer's return

BY JOEL THURTELL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

January 8, 2005

If Brian Klonowski wants to put on the uniform and badge of a Southgate cop Monday afternoon, Chief Larry Hall can't stop him. But Hall says he's angry that Mayor Dennis David ordered the 32-year-old officer's return to the force Wednesday, nine months shy of the year's suspension Hall ordered after Klonowski pleaded no contest last summer to a charge of aggravated assault in the beating of a woman in Romulus.

Klonowski, a kick boxer and martial arts expert, answered the charge July 22 in 34th District Court in Romulus. Judge Brian Oakley sentenced Klonowski to $2,000 in fines and costs, 30 days in a work program, 60 days on an electronic tether and 18 months of probation. For purposes of sentencing, a no-contest plea is treated like a guilty plea. "It's really sickening -- it's unbelievable," Hall said Thursday. "It creates the perception that misconduct is tolerated in the Southgate Police Department."

Klonowski's reinstatement is an affront to the woman he beat at a birthday party April 25, Hall said. Klonowski attacked 24-year-old Gina Falconer of Dearborn Heights, fracturing her right cheek and causing a hemorrhage to her right eye requiring stitches, Hall said.

[related news article:]
Hall said that, according to information he received from Romulus police, Klonowski had been drinking April 25 at a birthday party in Romulus and attacked 24-year-old Gina Falconer of Dearborn Heights. "He beat her bad," Hall said. "Her eye was laid wide open. Now, they have him taking urine samples." Klonowski is a kick boxer and a martial arts expert, Hall said.

Hall said Klonowski didn't know Falconer but bothered her throughout the party, regaling her with tales of his fighting prowess. Falconer was scared and told Klonowski several times to stop bothering her, finally threatening to hit him with a beer bottle, Hall said. Klonowski hit her several times. "Then he left the scene of the crime," Hall said.

David confirmed Friday that he changed Klonowski's 1-year suspension to 90 days, which will expire Monday, when Klonowski can again put on his holster and gun as a member of the 40-person department. Klonowski could not be reached Friday for comment.

Last month, Hall expressed outrage when he learned that Klonowski was working at the 28th District Court in Southgate as a technician testing urine samples of people on probation for drug and alcohol offenses. At the time, Hall remarked, "How about one criminal overseeing others?" And at the same time, David defended Klonowski as "a good officer." David said he reduced Klonowski's probation to 90 days because Hall had offered the shorter period during bargaining with Klonowski over his punishment. "Credibility is No. 1, and if the chief puts an offer on the table that is 90 days, he should be prepared to stand by that," David said.

"That's utter, absolute garbage," Hall said. During the negotiations, he said, he threatened to fire Klonowski but never offered a 90-day suspension. David said he had nothing to do with Klonowski's hiring at the court. As to Klonowski serving while on probation, David said other officers have worn the Southgate badge while serving court-ordered probation. "We've had other officers commit crimes, but not assaultive crimes, and they have been given a minimum of a year off," Hall said.

Of Falconer's injuries, David said, "She got a beating, and I am sorry it happened, but we all have to move forward." Hall said he's perplexed, disappointed and angry. "What does that tell people out there who've had an encounter with the police?" Hall said. "It's almost like something you'd see in a bad television series and, after half an hour, you'd say, 'Thank God this is not real.' But this is real."

I'm a bit puzzled here, how can a mayor overule a suspension? In the UK, other than the home secretary, I don't think any politician can directly affect the running of a police force. All such administration is kept firmly within the police's own command structure.

Federal appeals court affirms the rejection of a police applicant who scored too high on the Wonderlic entry exam.

A Connecticut corrections officer, who is a college graduate, was rejected for police employment because he scored 33 points on the Wonderlic Personnel Test and Scholastic Level Exam, revealing an equivalent IQ of 120-125. 27 others were disqualified for the same reason.

The applicant sued in federal court, and gained national media attention after a CBS 60 Minutes vignette. Last year, the judge dismissed the action because the plaintiff failed to prove he was a member of a protected class or "suspect group." The plaintiff "may have been disqualified unwisely, but he was not denied equal protection."

Moreover, the judge noted that "a body of professional literature concludes that hiring overqualified applicants leads to subsequent job dissatisfaction and turnover." The city used a professionally constructed test and followed the test provider's instructions.

In affirming, a three-judge appellate panel said, "Plaintiff presented some evidence that high scorers do not actually experience more job dissatisfaction, but that evidence does not create a factual issue, because it matters not whether the city's decision was correct so long as it was rational."

The "Fourteenth Amendment gives the federal courts no power to impose upon the States their views of what constitutes wise economic or social policy." Jordan v. City of New London, 2000 U.S. App. Lexis 22195 (1st Cir. 8/23/2000), affirming 1999 U.S.Dist. Lexis 14289, 15 IER Cases (BNA) 919 (D. Conn. 1999). Text: <http://www.tourolaw.edu/2ndCircuit/>.

» Research Note: A prior law enforcement challenge to the Wonderlic and similar tests was rejected in Reynolds v. Arizona, # 91-16189, 1993 U.S. App. Lexis 9915 (9th Cir.).

From the tone of the article, it tells me that they have precedent to do so because extra-smart people don't stick it out for the long haul.

On one hand, there's np legal restriction. On the other hand, there's always the issue of the validity ofthe studies being questionable.